Influence of Clustering on the Opinion Formation Dynamics in Online Social Networks

  • Rajkumar DasEmail author
  • Joarder Kamruzzaman
  • Gour Karmakar
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11306)


With the advent of Online Social Networks (OSNs), opinion formation dynamics continuously evolves, mainly because of the widespread use of OSNs as a platform of social interactions and our growing exposure to others’ opinions instantly. When presented with neighbours’ opinions in OSNs, the natural clustering ability of human agents enables them to perceive the grouping of opinions formed in the neighbourhood. A group with similar opinions exhibits stronger influence on an agent than the individual group members. Distance-based opinion formation models only consider the influence of neighbours who are within a confidence bound threshold in the opinion space. However, a bigger group formed outside this distance threshold can exhibit stronger influence than a group within the bound, especially when that group contains influential or popular agents like leaders. To the knowledge of the authors, the proposed model is the first to consider the impact of clustering capability of agent and incorporates the influence of opinion clusters (groups) formed outside the confidence bound. Simulation results show that our model can capture several characteristics of real-world opinion dynamics.


Opinion Clustering Centrality Consistency 


  1. 1.
    Das, A., Gollapudi, S., Munagala, K.: Modelling opinion dynamics in social networks. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, pp. 403–412 (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Xia, H., Wang, H., Xuan, Z.: Opinion dynamics: a multidisciplinary review and perspective on future research. Int. J. Knowl. Syst. Sci. 2(4), 72–91 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    DeGroot, M.H.: Reaching a consensus. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 69(345), 118–121 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clifford, P., Sudbury, A.: A model for spatial conflict. Biometrika 60(3), 881 (1973)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hegselmann, R., Krause, U.: Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence: models, analysis and simulation. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 5(3), 1–24 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deffuant, G., Neau, N., Amblard, F., Weisbuch, G.: Mixing beliefs among interacting agents. Adv. Complex Syst. 3(1), 87–98 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moussaid, M., Kaemmer, J.E., Analytis, P.P., Neth, H.: Social influence and the collective dynamics of opinion formation. PLoS ONE 8(11), e78433 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hassan, R., Karmakar, G., Kamruzzaman, J.: Reputation and user requirement based price modelling for dynamic spectrum access. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. 13(9), 2128–2140 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Das, R., Kamruzzaman, J., Karmakar, G.: Modelling majority and expert influences on opinion formation in online social networks. World Wide Web 21(3), 663–685 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Etesami, S. R.: Hegselmann-Krause Opinion Dynamics in Finite Dimensions. Potential-Based Analysis of Social, Communication, and Distributed Networks, pp. 69–89 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xie, Z., Song, X., Li, Q.: A review of opinion dynamics. In: Theory, Methodology, Tools and Applications for Modelling and Simulation of Complex Systems, pp. 349–357 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freeman, L.C.: Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Soc. Netw. 1(3), 215–239 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rajkumar Das
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Joarder Kamruzzaman
    • 1
    • 2
  • Gour Karmakar
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of CSEBangladesh University of Engineering and TechnologyDhakaBangladesh
  2. 2.School of Science, Engineering and ITFederation University AustraliaBallaratAustralia

Personalised recommendations